"One
of the common failings among honorable people is a failure to appreciate
how thoroughly dishonorable some other people can be, and how dangerous
it is to trust them." -- Thomas Sowell

The
brouhaha over the recent epiphany regarding junk science and climate
change duplicity is a big deal.

Science
is ‘supposed’ to be all about facts, evidence and proof.
The scientific method that kids are taught at an early age is explained
as “A method of discovering knowledge about the natural world
based in making falsifiable predictions (hypotheses), testing them empirically,
and developing peer-reviewed theories that best explain the known data.”
It is not ‘supposed’ to be a sporting event of ‘us’
versus ‘them’ or team competition.

Reportedly,
computer hackers obtained some 160 megabytes of emails from the Climate
Research Unit a University in England. The e-mails were exchanges between
researchers and policy advocates who shared a similar gospel according
to them. Shockingly, authorities were discussing the “destruction
and hiding of data that did not support global-warming claims”.
HELL-0!?!?

Protestations
to the contrary notwithstanding, exchanges about “the trick of
adding in the real temps to each series…to hid the decline (in
temperature),” is way egregious. Professor Phil Jones, head of
the Climate Research Unit and professor Michael E. Mann at Penn State
are now tap dancing.

Mann,
in an effort to defend the indefensible, told the New York Times, “scientists
often use the word ‘trick’ to refer to a good way to solve
a problem ‘and not something secret.’ Yeah…right!

There
is a boatload of damning evidence about concealing information that
does not coincide with the gospel according to Al Gore.

Jones
went so far as to encourage Mann to delete e-mail exchanges about the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s controversial assessment
report.

The
rats are scrambling big-time. Jones told Mann, Professor Malcolm Hughes
at University of Arizona and Professor Raymond Bradley of UMass/Amherst,
“I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the
CRU station temperature data. Don’t any of you three tell anybody
that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!” Too late pal!

Advertisement

Another
co-conspirator at CRU, Professor Tim Osborn, was told by Mann to hide
data because it supports critics of global warming.

Hackers
are reprehensible criminals. However, their sins pale in comparison
to the intentional deceit of lofty academics conspiring to delete data
that does not conform to their fantasy hypothesis. Although we only
know of the CRU emails and don’t know what we don’t know
about the broader conspiracy, we do know that facts, evidence, and documentation
that contradicts the global warming theocracy have intentionally been
destroyed, alerted and massaged.

I’ve
been grousing about global warming for over a decade. Last year I was
debating the issue with a professor from the University of North Carolina
and quoted an interview
I had done years ago with Dr. Fred Singer. It was a long interview
and rich in data that debunked the gospel according to Al. The professor’s
refutation consisted of blowing off Singer and “one of those”.

Talk
about those who don’t want to be confused with facts that contradict
a preconceived opinion and prejudice, there it is.

I
told Dr.Singer “I’m getting the feeling they can manipulate
data to get the results they want? He replied, “I don't think
they quite do that.” Now we learn, gosh-oh-gee-golly, that is
EXACTLY what they have been doing.

The
CRU goat rope reveals a long series of communications covering “how
best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process.”

CRU’s
researchers have been exposed as having “cherry-picked”
data in order to support their untrue claim that “global temperatures
had risen higher at the end of the 20th century than at any time in
the last millennium.” CRU also, “in contravention of all
acceptable behaviour in the international scientific community, conspired
for years, withholding data from researchers that did not conform to
their agenda.

One
of the most rabid propagandists of the global warming theocracy is George
Monbiot. Even he, albeit begrudgingly, concedes he should have been
more skeptical. Even he now admits the science needs to be rechecked
and fully vetted.

“It’s
no use pretending that this isn’t a major blow. The emails extracted
by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East
Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they
are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them.”

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

Monbiot,
to his credit, notes that “skepticism is the essential disposition
of our craft”. He concludes that “the opposite of skeptical
is gullible.

Skepticism
is the essential disposition of our craft, yet too many journalists
have abandoned it. Remember: the opposite of skeptical is gullible.”

"Geoff Metcalf is a nationally
syndicated radio talk show host for TALK AMERICA and a veteran media performer.
He has had an eclectic professional background covering a wide spectrum
of radio, television, magazine, and newspapers. A former Green Beret and
retired Army officer he is in great demand as a speaker. Visit Geoff's